|
Home > Archive > Data Storage > June 2005 > File replication - Windows disaster recovery
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
File replication - Windows disaster recovery
|
|
| The other Mike 2005-06-14, 2:46 am |
| I posted a little while ago concerning failover solutions for a
Windows 2000 server. Unfortunately, budget limitations prohibit the
solutions recommended. So....here's our situation now....have a 2000
member server that needs to be replicated to a seperate server (no
shared storage...just local drives in each and no automatic failover
needed). What needs to be replicated is just files and
directories...very simple. Problem is that these files number about
1.5 million (very small and change very often). I tried using
Robocopy with the mirror and monitor options but the process takes too
long...I need something that replicates the files as they are written.
Any cheap suggestions?
| |
| Rob Turk 2005-06-14, 2:46 am |
| "The other Mike" <nonone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:i2osa1dq2gis1gcf0httrlitf2tr9vohcv@
4ax.com...
>I posted a little while ago concerning failover solutions for a
> Windows 2000 server. Unfortunately, budget limitations prohibit the
> solutions recommended. So....here's our situation now....have a 2000
> member server that needs to be replicated to a seperate server (no
> shared storage...just local drives in each and no automatic failover
> needed). What needs to be replicated is just files and
> directories...very simple. Problem is that these files number about
> 1.5 million (very small and change very often). I tried using
> Robocopy with the mirror and monitor options but the process takes too
> long...I need something that replicates the files as they are written.
> Any cheap suggestions?
Depending on your future plans, wait for Win2003 'R2' to be released. It has
a built-in replication service just for this purpose.
Rob
| |
|
| How cheap is "cheap?" There are many options but none of them are
free. You need software that monitors the FS for updates and then
queues changed files for delivery to another system - confirming the
completion of all changes to the remote system. Its easy to explain,
but there is a lot of detailed housekeeping that needs to be done to
make sure everything is done correctly. This kind of software
necessarily integrates with the FS, which means it must work at a
fairly low level inside the system without errors and it needs to be
fast. You don't want this "cheap solution" to ignore errors and create
other problems do you? You might need to reset your price
excpectations.
The process of transferring files does not occur in real time, but
involves four basic components (this is a bit arbitrary I know, but you
have to draw the line somewhere) 1) identification of changed files,
2) queue management , 3) data transfer and acknowledgements, 4)
administration and logging.
I suggest you go to your favorite search engine and search for "windows
file replication" then contact the vendors you find and start checking
them out. If you find anything in your price range, then dig deeper and
ask how their product implements the four functions outlined above so
you can see how well it fits your requirements.
| |
| The other Mike 2005-06-14, 5:47 pm |
| Unfortunately it's not my decision to reset the price expectations.
When I say "cheap", I mean maybe around $1000. Everything I've seen
runs between $2000 and $4000 and you need 2 copies...one for each
server. I just need file replication without the bells and whistles
that's affordable.
On 14 Jun 2005 06:55:46 -0700, "mf" <marc@buildingstorage.com> wrote:
>You don't want this "cheap solution" to ignore errors and create
>other problems do you? You might need to reset your price
>excpectations.
| |
|
| So why don't you list the solutions you've checked out and maybe
somebody else reading this will identify one or two that you might
have missed?
| |
| Rob Turk 2005-06-14, 5:47 pm |
| "The other Mike" <nonone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:20uta15piilr76v2nkgh7fqqvhtbu36g1i@
4ax.com...
> Unfortunately it's not my decision to reset the price expectations.
> When I say "cheap", I mean maybe around $1000. Everything I've seen
> runs between $2000 and $4000 and you need 2 copies...one for each
> server. I just need file replication without the bells and whistles
> that's affordable.
>
Maybe you should go back to whomever set the $1000 amount and simply tell
them that it can't be done properly for that kind of money. Ask them what
they based that budget on, and have them explain why your 1.5 million files
are not worth more than $1000 to protect.
Rob
| |
| The other Mike 2005-06-14, 5:47 pm |
| I haven't checked out any in the price range I specified because I
can't seem to find one which is why I'm posting here for
recommendations. I looked into CA high availability, Veritas,
Doubletake, IP Replicator but like I said, they're all higher priced
solutions.
On 14 Jun 2005 11:25:27 -0700, "mf" <marc@buildingstorage.com> wrote:
>So why don't you list the solutions you've checked out and maybe
>somebody else reading this will identify one or two that you might
>have missed?
| |
|
| You can set robocopy to only copy over newer files, with the /XO switch. I
would create a bat file using the code below, and schedule it to run every
night starting at say 10 pm? The log+ means append, so if you want a new
one, take out the +. The first one will take the longest, then it will only
copy newer files. try it- also, see link for other switches,f or deleting
older files etc.
robocopy Y:\source E:\destination /e /r:1 /w:0 /np /xo /log+:output.log
http://home.earthlink.net/~rlively/.../R/ROBOCOPY.HTM
--
Kat
MCNGP # 29, MCDBA # ? of Millions
What woud you do for a Kit Kat bar?
"Rob Turk" <_wipe_me_r.turk@chello.nl> wrote in message
news:t1ure.1265$vS6.1139@amstwist00...
> "The other Mike" <nonone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:i2osa1dq2gis1gcf0httrlitf2tr9vohcv@
4ax.com...
>
> Depending on your future plans, wait for Win2003 'R2' to be released. It
has
> a built-in replication service just for this purpose.
>
> Rob
>
>
| |
| The other Mike 2005-06-16, 2:46 am |
| Actually I spent the day experimenting with the Win 2003 resource kit
version of Robocopy....set it up with the /MIR and /MON options and it
seems to be working really well. Scans thousands of directories and
about 1.4 million files in about a minute and a half. The /MON option
keeps it running and starts again 1 minute after it finishes the past
run. I think this might be our solution.
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 13:17:41 -0700, "Kat" <kit-kat bar> wrote:
>You can set robocopy to only copy over newer files, with the /XO switch. I
>would create a bat file using the code below, and schedule it to run every
>night starting at say 10 pm? The log+ means append, so if you want a new
>one, take out the +. The first one will take the longest, then it will only
>copy newer files. try it- also, see link for other switches,f or deleting
>older files etc.
>robocopy Y:\source E:\destination /e /r:1 /w:0 /np /xo /log+:output.log
>
>
>http://home.earthlink.net/~rlively/.../R/ROBOCOPY.HTM
|
|
|
|
|